Turnout in South End, where casino would be built, a mixed bag early in MGM Springfield referendum

SPRINGFIELD — Turnout in the heart of where the MGM Springfield casino will potentially be located was a mixed bag by early afternoon on a special election day for the city's referendum on the host community agreement between the city and the casino developer.

Precincts 3B and 3C, which essentially split Central Street in the city's South End, where the casino is planned if all the political stars align, saw voter participation that was less than expected and more robust, respectively.

"We've seen almost double what we see in a primary," said precinct 3B warden Jose Rosario.

There were 70 votes cast around noon and Rosario said he expected to see about 150 more at the precinct on William Street by the time the polls closed at 8 p.m.

In the adjacent precinct, 3C, warden Elizabeth Hernandez said she saw her numbers lagging and thought the issue would bring more participation. Just 89 had voted just after noon.

Several poll workers said they were dismayed that the ballot, which was two pages long, with one devoted to the benefits of MGM's plan, was not more balanced in their views.

"There's all the affirmative reasons that MGM is a good plan, but where is the second page of all the other reasons?" why voters may vote it down, asked poll worker Gloria Peeler.

The ballot offers a litany of positives linked to the MGM plan including $50 million in annual "biddable goods and services"; a certain amount of entertainment events (four) per calendar year; ancillary development, including financial bolstering of Union Station and DaVinci Park; responsible gaming mitigation; and infrastructure improvements.

Poll workers including Peeler said they would have liked to see a comparable laundry list of arguments on the anti-casino side to inform voters. There were no sign holders, for or against, outside those precincts early in the day. [see the ballot at the end of this article]